How much of that research is based on 'adjusted' data sets? Who is using the actual underlying raw data, and using it properly?
Using it properly means that you have to adjust for various errors. Simple example: instead of using a wooden bucket and thermometer to measure sea temperature, ships now continuously measure temperature at inlet of cooling water. While both methods are fine, there is a small offset between the two, so if you want to use both in same graph, you need to adjust one or the other.
The raw data is still available for download, as well papers describing the methods for adjusting. If you want to propose a better adjustment method, go ahead.
So why should those governments be concerned, when they will be getting more water - not less?
Because the glaciers act as a reservoir, releasing a steady stream throughout the year. Without glaciers, you get floods and droughts depending on season and weather patterns.
This is like a race between a horse and a car, which the horse wins because the car was forced to try to run with an empty gas tank, and then you go ahead and say "So what? The horse didn't get any petrol either so it was a tooootally fair setup".
In my analogy, Stockfish is the horse. And AlphaZero is an early model steam car. People complain because the horse didn't get the best food, and it wasn't the world's fastest horse, and it was too hot outside, and the horse didn't get proper rest.
What they are missing is that the early car is still at the beginning of the development curve, while the horse is already at its peak.
In a few years, neural network engines will be a few hundred elo higher, and there simply won't be any contest anymore.
No, it's not fair, because a 386 with 4MB is completely incapable of even running the AlphaZero code (or Stockfish code), simply because the program and its data won't even fit.
That's what I call crippled.
The conditions in the match were not optimal, but did not make a huge difference. Maybe you could have gained a few dozen elo by optimizing the system, which is not really a big deal overall, and certainly not "crippled", especially considering that Deepmind could have added similar elo to AlphaZero by adding proper time management and endgame tablebases.
The big difference is that an opening book contains literal moves, whereas a neural net represents generalized patterns, similar to how a human grandmaster's brain has these patterns. If you give AlphaZero a position that's not in any of the games it played, it will still find appropriate patterns and use them to evaluate the position.
it is not surprising that it is superior to a software without one
If you take a weak engine with an opening book, then Stockfish is still going to be superior, because as soon as it plays a non-book move, the weaker engine is on its own. Even if the move was technically a mistake, it's unlikely that a weaker engine is going to be able to exploit it against Stockfish. The engine would actually have to recognize that the Stockfish move was bad, and understand how to exploit it.
For example, if Stockfish makes a bad move that potentially traps its bishop, the opponent needs to understand what moves to play to keep the bishop trapped, and why those are important. With specific patterns for trapped bishops, that's not going to happen.
That's like saying a fat runner is optimized to use a car. Stockfish isn't really optimized for opening books, it just sucks without them, mainly because the difference between a good and poor move in the opening may not manifest itself in a concrete eval difference far beyond the search horizon. As shown in some of the games, Stockfish doesn't care if its bishop gets trapped behind its own pawns. A bishop is still a bishop. It may get a penalty for limited mobility, but it doesn't get a penalty for being stuck for 40 moves. And the heuristic eval that Stockfish uses is just too simple to recognize these concepts.
bizarre time controls that removed stockfish's edge in time management
AlphaZero got the same time control.
stockfish didn't get its opening books
AlphaZero didn't get an opening book either.
nor did it get endgame tablebases
Neither did AlphaZero. Also note that in many of the games, Stockfish was basically lost in the early middlegame.
only 1GB when it should've had 64GB or more
That's the only legitimate concern, but the whole argument is stupid nitpicking nevertheless. This is like a race between a horse and the first model car. The exact conditions and outcome are secondary to the proof of validity of general principles. AlphaZero was just the first iteration of a new development. The fact that it came close to Stockfish at all is enough to show that this approach has merit. Sure, the SF setup was not optimal, but it wasn't completely crippled either.
You're overlooking the terrible conversion between power sent into the transmitting antenna and the power that's actually coming into the room where you're sitting.
Sun activity is actually fairly low. The most recent peak was in the 80's, and it's dropped a bit since then. In the same time, temperature has gone up rather dramatically.
Where is the CO2 coming from? The oceans release it as the temperature rise
And where did all the CO2 from fossil fuel burning end up ?
Here's an exercise for you: find the numbers for total amount of oil, coal, and gas that the world has used in the last century. For each of those, calculate how much CO2 is produced by burning them. Add up, and compare total CO2 with increase in atmosphere.
There is only one writer, and thousands of readers, so it's better if the writer spends 5 extra minutes for some descriptions, rather than each of the readers figuring it out individually.
Slashdot Mirror
Best to skip the media and go straight to the published paper.
How much of that research is based on 'adjusted' data sets? Who is using the actual underlying raw data, and using it properly?
Using it properly means that you have to adjust for various errors. Simple example: instead of using a wooden bucket and thermometer to measure sea temperature, ships now continuously measure temperature at inlet of cooling water. While both methods are fine, there is a small offset between the two, so if you want to use both in same graph, you need to adjust one or the other.
The raw data is still available for download, as well papers describing the methods for adjusting. If you want to propose a better adjustment method, go ahead.
Satellites don't measure surface temperature
Climate is nothing but averaged weather, both in space and time, which is what they are doing here.
The bizarre thing is that (so far) if I re-send the exact same e-mail a few minutes later, it doesn't bounce.
Not only is their AI very smart, it's quick learning too!
The scans revealed how sugar was being turned into energy in different parts of the volunteers' brains
Sugar ? My brain runs on beta-hydroxybutyrate, you insensitive clod.
And - consequently - substantially stronger than their formed-in-a-gravity-well counterparts.
But insanely more expensive.
and they'd only pay the cost of fuel, probably less than $1million.
Until a rocket with 100 tourists explodes.
The green glow in the exhaust near the end of the firing indicates the copper liner in the engine chamber burned by accident
It's burning an engine-rich flame.
So why should those governments be concerned, when they will be getting more water - not less?
Because the glaciers act as a reservoir, releasing a steady stream throughout the year. Without glaciers, you get floods and droughts depending on season and weather patterns.
Less money spend on smartphones means that more money is available for other things.
This is like a race between a horse and a car, which the horse wins because the car was forced to try to run with an empty gas tank, and then you go ahead and say "So what? The horse didn't get any petrol either so it was a tooootally fair setup".
In my analogy, Stockfish is the horse. And AlphaZero is an early model steam car. People complain because the horse didn't get the best food, and it wasn't the world's fastest horse, and it was too hot outside, and the horse didn't get proper rest.
What they are missing is that the early car is still at the beginning of the development curve, while the horse is already at its peak.
In a few years, neural network engines will be a few hundred elo higher, and there simply won't be any contest anymore.
which as you pointed out, is totally fair.
No, it's not fair, because a 386 with 4MB is completely incapable of even running the AlphaZero code (or Stockfish code), simply because the program and its data won't even fit.
That's what I call crippled.
The conditions in the match were not optimal, but did not make a huge difference. Maybe you could have gained a few dozen elo by optimizing the system, which is not really a big deal overall, and certainly not "crippled", especially considering that Deepmind could have added similar elo to AlphaZero by adding proper time management and endgame tablebases.
I'd beat AlphaZero in chess even though I would play under the same parameters (Single core, 386 with 4MB of RAM)
Let me get this clear. You are arguing that your brain is roughly equivalent to a single core 386 ?
The big difference is that an opening book contains literal moves, whereas a neural net represents generalized patterns, similar to how a human grandmaster's brain has these patterns. If you give AlphaZero a position that's not in any of the games it played, it will still find appropriate patterns and use them to evaluate the position.
it is not surprising that it is superior to a software without one
If you take a weak engine with an opening book, then Stockfish is still going to be superior, because as soon as it plays a non-book move, the weaker engine is on its own. Even if the move was technically a mistake, it's unlikely that a weaker engine is going to be able to exploit it against Stockfish. The engine would actually have to recognize that the Stockfish move was bad, and understand how to exploit it.
For example, if Stockfish makes a bad move that potentially traps its bishop, the opponent needs to understand what moves to play to keep the bishop trapped, and why those are important. With specific patterns for trapped bishops, that's not going to happen.
That's like saying a fat runner is optimized to use a car. Stockfish isn't really optimized for opening books, it just sucks without them, mainly because the difference between a good and poor move in the opening may not manifest itself in a concrete eval difference far beyond the search horizon. As shown in some of the games, Stockfish doesn't care if its bishop gets trapped behind its own pawns. A bishop is still a bishop. It may get a penalty for limited mobility, but it doesn't get a penalty for being stuck for 40 moves. And the heuristic eval that Stockfish uses is just too simple to recognize these concepts.
Woohoo Google, good job building a computer that can click fast? Should they be congratulated for that?
You think that beating a pro in Starcraft is just a matter of clicking fast ?
bizarre time controls that removed stockfish's edge in time management
AlphaZero got the same time control.
stockfish didn't get its opening books
AlphaZero didn't get an opening book either.
nor did it get endgame tablebases
Neither did AlphaZero. Also note that in many of the games, Stockfish was basically lost in the early middlegame.
only 1GB when it should've had 64GB or more
That's the only legitimate concern, but the whole argument is stupid nitpicking nevertheless. This is like a race between a horse and the first model car. The exact conditions and outcome are secondary to the proof of validity of general principles. AlphaZero was just the first iteration of a new development. The fact that it came close to Stockfish at all is enough to show that this approach has merit. Sure, the SF setup was not optimal, but it wasn't completely crippled either.
For 100 microwatts?
You're overlooking the terrible conversion between power sent into the transmitting antenna and the power that's actually coming into the room where you're sitting.
How does a bird define flying ?
Military superiority is one of the goals.
Sun activity is actually fairly low. The most recent peak was in the 80's, and it's dropped a bit since then. In the same time, temperature has gone up rather dramatically.
Where is the CO2 coming from? The oceans release it as the temperature rise
And where did all the CO2 from fossil fuel burning end up ?
Here's an exercise for you: find the numbers for total amount of oil, coal, and gas that the world has used in the last century. For each of those, calculate how much CO2 is produced by burning them. Add up, and compare total CO2 with increase in atmosphere.
I want to do die peacefully in my sleep, like my grandfather did. Not screaming in terror like his passengers.
You share most of your genes with every random stranger.
There is only one writer, and thousands of readers, so it's better if the writer spends 5 extra minutes for some descriptions, rather than each of the readers figuring it out individually.